NJ Appellate Law Blog – NJ Appellate Lawyer Bruce D. Greenberg blogs about Appeals and Appellate Law Practice

A "Hostile/Warlike" Exclusion in an Insurance Policy Does Not Bar Coverage for a Cyberattack

Merck & Co., Inc. v. Ace American Ins. Co., 475 N.J. Super. 420 (App. Div. 2023). Plaintiff ("Merck") suffered a cyberattack from malware known as NotPetya. An expert for Merck's...

Verizon's Arbitration Agreement "Unenforceable in Its Entirety" Since it is "Permeated by Provisions Which Are Unconscionable and Violative of New Jersey Public Policy"

Achey v. Cellco Partnership, 475 N.J. Super. 446 (App. Div. 2023). New Jersey and federal law favor arbitration, and courts will often enforce arbitration clauses contained in consumer contracts. But...

Willingboro Mall Rule That Settlements in Mediation Must be Reduced to Writing and Signed at the Mediation Applies to Voluntary Mediations as Well as Court-Ordered Ones

Gold Tree Spa, Inc. v. PD Nail Corp., 475 N.J. Super. 240 (App. Div. 2023). In Willingboro Mall, Ltd. v. 240/242 Franklin Ave., LLC, 215 N.J. 242 (2013), the Supreme...

Two Constitutional Law Decisions From the Appellate Division

State v. Higginbotham, 475 N.J. Super. 205 (App. Div. 2023); In re Appeal of Denial of M.U.'s Application for a Handgun Purchase Permit, 475 N.J. Super. 148 (App. Div. 2023)....

Another "Kind for Kind" Affidavit of Merit Decision

Pfannenstein v. Surrey, 475 N.J. Super. 83 (App. Div. 2023). At least since Buck v. Henry, 207 N.J. 377 (2011), and Nicholas v. Mynster, 216 N.J. 463 (2013), New Jersey's...

The Appellate Division Declines to Rewrite N.J.S.A. 39:6A-4.5(b)

Castano v. Augustine, 475 N.J. Super. 71 (App. Div. 2023). N.J.S.A. 39:6A-4.5(b), enacted as part of the reform of New Jersey's automobile insurance system, states: "Any person who is convicted...

The Last Half of February in the Appellate Division

This follows up on yesterday's post about the second half of February in the Supreme Court. Here are summaries of some of the Appellate Division's published opinions issued in the...

"Ministerial Exception" That Bars Employment Discrimination Claims by Ministers Employed by Religious Institutions Also Covers Other Claims Related to the Institution's Employment Decision

Hyman v. Rosenbaum Yeshiva of New Jersey, 474 N.J. Super. 561 (App. Div. 2023). As Judge Mitterhoff explained in her opinion for the Appellate Division today, the Free Exercise and...

The "Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine": An Anniversary

On this date in 2002, the Supreme Court decided Matsumoto v. Matsumoto, 171 N.J. 110 (2002). By a 5-2 vote (majority opinion by Justice Long; dissent by Justice Verniero, joined...

Smith & Wesson Fails to Block a Subpoena Issued by the Attorney General Under the Consumer Fraud Act

Platkin v. Smith & Wesson Sales Co., Inc., 474 N.J. Super. 476 (App. Div. 2023). In 2020, the Attorney General's office issued to Smith & Wesson an administrative action subpoena...

1 2 3 4 567 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45…Last

The "Limited Attorney Exemption" of the Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act is Held Unconstitutional as Violative of the Separation of Powers and Void for Vagueness

Anchor Law Firm, PLLC v. State of New Jersey, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act, N.J.S.A. 17:16G-1 et seq. ("DACCA"), prohibits debt adjusters in New Jersey from operating for a profit. There is an exception for attorneys not "principally engaged" (a term not defined in the statute) in debt adjustment. That exception, adopted in a 1986 amendment, replaced a prior version of the DACCA that had exempted all attorneys from its scope....

"Hot Fun in the Summertime": Appellate Division Summer Parts

In an Order available here, Chief Justice Rabner announced the lineup for the Appellate Division's summer Parts. As has been customary, the "summer" runs not between the meteorological start and end dates for summer, nor from Memorial Day to Labor Day, but from June 16 through September 7....

The Supreme Court Confirms That Municipalities Can be Subjected to Sanctions for Frivolous Litigation

Borough of Englewood Cliffs v. Trautner, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). This appeal presented the question of whether municipalities can be liable to pay sanctions for frivolous litigation, under the Frivolous Litigation Statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59.1 ("the FLS"). In a 5-0 opinion written by Justice Fasciale (Chief Justice Rabner and Justice Hoffman did not participate), the Court affirmed, as modified, the decision of the Appellate Division that upheld the Law Division's imposition of FLS sanctions against the Borough....

The "Castle Doctrine"

State v. Bragg, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). A jury found defendant guilty of twelve charged counts, including attempted murder, kidnapping, aggravated assault, terroristic threats, possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, endangering, and two lesser-included offenses of harassment. Some of those charges involved the use of deadly force. Persons may not use deadly force if the can retreat with complete safety. But under the "castle doctrine," an exception to the general rule, a person "is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling, unless he was the initial aggressor." N.J.S.A. 2C:3-4(b)(2)(b)(i). That doctrine derives from the common law....